CNN Reports: Obama/Clinton in Formal Talks For VP

CNN News is reporting this morning that the Clinton and Obama campaigns are in formal talks to have Hillary become his VP running  mate.

The two Democratic campaigns are talking about ways for Clinton, to drop her bid for president that may include joining the Illinois senator's ticket, CNN reported. Talks are in a ``very preliminary'' stage and are described as ``difficult,'' the network said.

Further Updates Forthcoming

CNN: Clinton May Join Ticket

UPDATE: Citing anonymous sources, the network reports that the Clinton campaign is pushing for a compromise with Obama and outlining three possible scenarios, including her as his VP pick. Formal Talks

Tags: clinton, CNN, obama, VP (all tags)

Comments

201 Comments

This is the only logical solution! n/t

by bobswern 2008-05-23 05:37AM | 0 recs
Re: CNN Breaking News: Obama/Clinton in Formal Tal

I have no problem with her, but with Bill, he is too public. either he has to be completely vetted. or Obama will be hurt by him, who is Bill getting money from? who were his library donors?

the GOP will use these things to hit Obama with.

by TruthMatters 2008-05-23 05:38AM | 0 recs
Re: CNN Breaking News: Obama/Clinton in Formal Tal

Completely vetted. Stronach/Burkle/all that foreign money. He'd never do it.

by heresjohnny 2008-05-23 05:40AM | 0 recs
Re: CNN Breaking News: Obama/Clinton in Formal Tal

Who's leaking this anyway?

One would think it was the Clinton campaign, since it ties Obama's hands somewhat.

On the other hand, it's basically a concession.  I've been hanging around here so long that I don't know how widespread the belief is that Hillary Clinton's campaign, at least as far as for President, is over.

by Jess81 2008-05-23 06:20AM | 0 recs
Re: CNN Breaking News: Obama/Clinton in Formal Tal

I'd say Clinton testing the waters and slowly transitioning her supporters from Presidential Battle Mode to Vice Presidential Battle Mode.

I see no upside for Obama to do this unless he's screwing with her.  

by heresjohnny 2008-05-23 06:29AM | 0 recs
The way it's phrased

it looks more like a demand of concessions in exchange for dropping out.

Not that there's anything inherently wrong with that -- that's negotiation.  I just wonder what Clinton's BATNA is?  Stage a floor fight?

by Rorgg 2008-05-23 07:18AM | 0 recs
Re: CNN Breaking News: Obama/Clinton in Formal Tal

yesterday i predicted that the BO campaign leaked her request/his denial for vp in a brilliant tactical move.  today i am even more convinced.

she is still in the race and by leaking this it delegitimizes her.  by leaking it to gauge public opinion through polls and the blogosphere it backs her into a corner.  now when it is offered to her publicly the total onus of party unity falls onto her shoulders.  if she accepts or declines so come her supporters.

this guy is brilliant!

by canadian gal 2008-05-23 10:04AM | 0 recs
Re: CNN Breaking News: Obama/Clinton in Formal Tal

I wouldn't worry about Bill, she has already put him in his place and has run a great campaign for president. There are areas in which Bill can be a great asset to an Obama administration, for instance Ambassador to the world, who better than Bill. He is loved and respected across the globe, unlike the bozo that is in the white house now.

by steve468 2008-05-23 05:41AM | 0 recs
Ambassador To The World

Who better than Bill? That's easy: Barack Obama.

Isn't the POTUS kind of an "Ambassador To The World" anyway?

by Hatch 2008-05-23 05:53AM | 0 recs
Re: Ambassador To The World

He could send bill on all those meetings without precondition.  It would be a good way to avoid being the laughed at by the entire world for the massive FP blunder of the President walking into a room without knowing exactly what is gonna happen.

by nyarch 2008-05-23 07:22AM | 0 recs
Re: CNN Breaking News: Obama/Clinton in Formal Tal

Put him in his place?  I haven't noticed much of that going on.

by neeborMolgula 2008-05-23 05:53AM | 0 recs
Guilt by marriage?

Last I checked, Bill Clinton is not in talks with the Obama campaign to be on the ticket. This is about Hillary Clinton. Period.

by bobswern 2008-05-23 05:42AM | 0 recs
Re: Guilt by marriage?

Bill is the one pushing her as VP.

by parahammer 2008-05-23 05:42AM | 0 recs
Re: Guilt by marriage?

Yes. You cannot separate yourself from your husband if he is a former President. Everything he does/has done is an extension of her, and if she is VP, and extension of Obama.

by Lost Thought 2008-05-23 05:48AM | 0 recs
Re: Guilt by marriage?

The spouse gets vetted to. Surprises are not allowed.

by heresjohnny 2008-05-23 05:50AM | 0 recs
Re: CNN Breaking News: Obama/Clinton in Formal Tal

What is all this hate for Bill about? I thought we were laying off the candidates' spouses? Just so you know, there are those of us who love Bill and would love him until the "cows come home". "Lay off" Bill!

by Actright 2008-05-23 05:50AM | 0 recs
Re: CNN Breaking News: Obama/Clinton in Formal Tal

I think Bill got vetted when he was elected president twice. Period.

by Jaz 2008-05-23 05:52AM | 0 recs
Re: CNN Breaking News: Obama/Clinton in Formal Tal

No, Bill needs to be re-vetted. There are some seriously questionable pictures of Bill out there which I have seen that he would need to explain. Just because you are a former president doesn't mean you don't get vetted. That is the reason why this ticket won't happen.

by sweet potato pie 2008-05-23 05:58AM | 0 recs
Re: CNN Breaking News: Obama/Clinton in Formal Tal

When is ANYBODY gonna vet Obama?

by nyarch 2008-05-23 07:24AM | 0 recs
Re: CNN Breaking News: Obama/Clinton in Formal Tal

seriously, you need to honor the Clintons already. If he hadn't ended our image as the party of welfare and being soft on crime, Obama would be nobody. He does not need to be vetted. He didn't attend church was a racist America and white hating pastor for 20 years. I urge all to troll or hide rate these Clinton-hating Free Republic remarks against the Clintons.

by DiamondJay 2008-05-23 07:49AM | 0 recs
Clinton "unvetted" himself

with the Rich Pardon.  When he sold a pardon for $400,000.00 the Clinton Library donors became fair game.  Espeically now when they refuse to disclose who gave how much.  Thats a 500 million dollar Pandora's Box

by xenontab 2008-05-23 06:01AM | 0 recs
Re: Clinton "unvetted" himself

This is true, plus Hillary's brothers.  There's a lot of dirt there.

by interestedbystander 2008-05-23 06:22AM | 0 recs
Re: Clinton "unvetted" himself

Now who's using 'Republican talking points' ...

by VAAlex 2008-05-23 06:25AM | 0 recs
The VP and the spouse get vetted.

That's just the way it goes. The Clintons aren't above that.

by heresjohnny 2008-05-23 06:32AM | 0 recs
Re: The VP and the spouse get vetted.

nope, they are above it. and should be treated as such. If we were still the party of welfare and soft on crime like frmo 1968-1988, Obama would still be just another Chicago hack in the state legislature. O yea he still IS a Chicago hack.

by DiamondJay 2008-05-23 07:50AM | 0 recs
Go away GOP troll.

by heresjohnny 2008-05-23 08:28AM | 0 recs
Re: Go away GOP troll.

yea because I'm the one badmouthing the only Democrat elected to two terms since Franklin Roosevelt.

by DiamondJay 2008-05-23 08:32AM | 0 recs
Re: Go away GOP troll.

Uprating to unhide, but frankly you're both in a trolling war.

by duende 2008-05-23 09:13AM | 0 recs
Re: Go away GOP troll.

DJ is operating in racist fact-free land so I have to disagree.

by heresjohnny 2008-05-23 09:21AM | 0 recs
Re: Go away GOP troll.

I'm with you totally on that, man. Now I've caught up a bit with his history I'm beginning to understand. But don't get caught in his trap. He's exposing himself by what he says and does. If you've trolled him it's harder to un-hiderate you without looking completely partial.  

by duende 2008-05-23 09:28AM | 0 recs
Re: Go away GOP troll.

Fair enough.

by heresjohnny 2008-05-23 09:35AM | 0 recs
Uh no. He's had lots going on since then.

All of that gets vetted.

by heresjohnny 2008-05-23 06:31AM | 0 recs
Re: CNN Breaking News: Obama/Clinton in Formal Tal

Bill Clinton is a little more than a candidate's spouse.  

by Blue Neponset 2008-05-23 05:54AM | 0 recs
Re: CNN Breaking News: Obama/Clinton in Formal Tal

So sayz you and MSNBC and the hate-mongering pundits and the gophers of destruction and the body and soul snatchers.

by Actright 2008-05-23 08:09AM | 0 recs
You seriously think that the Repugs are...

going to hit Obama on with Clinton crap when they have...

Wright
Rezko
Ayers
Bitter

to talk about, make shit up, and define Obama?

OMG.

by cosbo 2008-05-23 05:59AM | 0 recs
Yes

Because none of the Obama stuff is sticking.

Besides, why limit yourself if you can wallow in all the filth you can find?

by Dracomicron 2008-05-23 06:02AM | 0 recs
Re: Yes

I thought the Obama campaign blamed their loses in Kentucky and West Virginia or viral-emails aka, muslimgate, wrightgate?

by Jaz 2008-05-23 06:06AM | 0 recs
Huh?

No... I've no idea how you came to that conclusion.

I mean, sure, there are some voters out there that might bite for that stuff, but Clinton won in Kentucky and West Virginia because she's exceptionally strong in Appalachia and Obama has a little trouble connecting with lower-educated voters.

Really, Obama's been great at countering smear tactics.  I wouldn't worry about it.

by Dracomicron 2008-05-23 06:13AM | 0 recs
Re: Huh?

If Obama was confident that he would be so "great at countering smear tactics" he wouldn't even need to discuss VP with Hillary.

He isn't confident of a GE win against McPain without the support of her followers.

by wasanyonehurt 2008-05-23 06:22AM | 0 recs
He's not discussing it

Except maybe to say, "no."

by Dracomicron 2008-05-23 06:36AM | 0 recs
Re: Huh?

Oh, to be sure he isn't confident about winning without a good chunk of her supporters.  If Hillary wants to push for the VP, Obama has to listen because she could torpedo the party if she wants (I can't believe she would do this, but plenty of her supporters on this site appear to want her to do exactly that if she loses the nom).

That being said, if she doesn't push really hard for it, having a key Clinton supporter on the ticket with him (Strickland from Ohio, I say) could help mend the fence AND get him key regional support in the rust belt.  If there isn't a graceful way for Hillary herself to be on the ticket (how could he take her after what she said about him, how could she be on his ticket after what he said about her, etc, etc), then a supporter who would help him in Ohio would do him a lot of good in the GE.

by minnesotaryan 2008-05-23 06:52AM | 0 recs
Not Quite Right

Wright definitely weakened Obama in the primary, and the GOP will surely try to use that in the GE. Not sure how effective it will be though. Same goes for bitter. Ayers and other "guilt by association" connections don't seem to have had much of a discernible effect yet aside from strengthening the suspicions of people who were never inclined to vote for Obama in the first place. But there's no doubt we'll hear more about that stuff.

Please give it up with the Rezko bullshit though, ok? That has been such a weak line of attack it's not even funny. That one hasn't gotten Hillary any traction whatsoever, I'd be surprised if the GOP or any 527s wasted any money on pointless Rezko attack ads.

by Hatch 2008-05-23 06:11AM | 0 recs
Sure

I'll give you that Wright has caused some damage, but the media narrative there is pretty much over... assuming that his book doesn't come out in like October.

by Dracomicron 2008-05-23 06:14AM | 0 recs
Re: Sure

We live in a Democratic Primary bubble, media narrative have a way of re-animating in November.  

Dukakis thought his "soft on crime" label was over in the primary then Bush #1 pounded him with it in the GE.

by wasanyonehurt 2008-05-23 06:25AM | 0 recs
Not sure McCain wants to go there

I mean, does he really want to invite comparison to Parsley, Falwell, and Hagee?

by Dracomicron 2008-05-23 06:35AM | 0 recs
Re: Not sure McCain wants to go there

He didn't sit in their pews for 20 years, marry him .. . yada yada ...

by wasanyonehurt 2008-05-23 06:38AM | 0 recs
Re: Not sure McCain wants to go there

Well Parsley he calls a spiritual guide so that's enough and he sought out Hagee. However, he just rejected and denounced them publicly as they were starting to draw some serious attention in the corporate media.

by heresjohnny 2008-05-23 06:40AM | 0 recs
Yeah

He only sought out their endorsement only to discard them later.

This guy can't even vet the lunatic preachers he courts, how can we trust him not to fill his administration with the same kind of corrupt sleazeballs Bush keeps?

by Dracomicron 2008-05-23 06:41AM | 0 recs
Oh they will use Rezko....

because he becomes a seed from which an attack ad grows....they made up shit on the Clintons for years. Do you seriously think they won't do the same to Obama.

by cosbo 2008-05-23 06:22AM | 0 recs
Re: Oh they will use Rezko....

Because they don't have criminal donors??

by heresjohnny 2008-05-23 06:41AM | 0 recs
One wonders why pointing out that the GOP

has criminal donors on a DEMOCRATIC website garners a TR....

by heresjohnny 2008-05-23 09:22AM | 0 recs
Re: Oh they will use Rezko....

I'm sure that you will help defend him agaisnt these attacks.

by parahammer 2008-05-23 06:42AM | 0 recs
You think I matter?

It's media. It's them who will turn against Obama if he goes 1 on 1 with McCain. They will turn against Clinton also. But they've already turned against and she is still winning. That's what we actually need to win the GE. Someone who the media hates and can still win.  That's why she's ultimately stronger than Obama.

The media is not our friend and Obama supporters are being suckered by their positive coverage of him. Positive now. Negative later.

by cosbo 2008-05-23 07:15AM | 0 recs
Re: You think I matter?

The media coverage of Obama's problems hasn't been nice. It's been terrible for him. It likely cost him PA or the chance to turn PA into IN.

His positives simply outweigh his negatives.  

by heresjohnny 2008-05-23 09:24AM | 0 recs
Please sell that bridge to someone else...

have you watched MSNBC aka the Obama Network lately?

by cosbo 2008-05-23 09:49AM | 0 recs
Re: Please sell that bridge to someone else...

Well I'm sure they're less fair and balanced than Fox news but yes I've seen Pat Buchanan and Joe Scarborough selling their racist tripe on MSNBC why do you ask?

by heresjohnny 2008-05-23 12:03PM | 0 recs
Re: You seriously think that the Repugs are...

Uh yeah. The GOP hates the Clintons and can use the "heartbeat away from the Presidency" argument to rally the troops.

Rezko is meaningless to the GOP as they love shady donors.

Wright has been divorced. McCain had to do it with his crazy pastors too.

Ayers is old. Literally.

Bitter voters aren't going to vote for Obama anyway.

I'd worry most about the mooslim smear spread by Democrats and Republicans.

by heresjohnny 2008-05-23 06:39AM | 0 recs
Again interesting that pointing out problems the

GOP will have on a DEMOCRATIC website earns a TR.

by heresjohnny 2008-05-23 09:25AM | 0 recs
The only Dem who has won
You want Bill to be "completely vetted"? Um, the only Democrat to win the White House in, um, 30 years?  Yeah, keep dreaming my friend.  Bill Clinton has more experience/ qualifications than Mr. Obama- in his pinkie finger. Let me just say this- if Obama picks Clinton- it's because HE NEEDS HER.  Period.  No other reason.  Why does he need her?  Because he's winning this nomination based on the strength of his Caucus State wins (i.e.- activist participation).  He is not a good candidate, deeply flawed (most fatally in his swing-state weakness).  He is also winning this nomination due to the the Hillary Campaign's early crappiness.  They have since become a great machine, but early on they were seriously incompetent. All that being said-
If Hillary decided to take his VP slot, he should thank his lucky stars.  He will also need Bill Clinton to help him win over the "working class" voters who find Obama unappealing.
by easyE 2008-05-23 06:52AM | 0 recs
Re: The only Dem who has won

So he doesn't need to be vetted?? hahaha. Special treatment entitlement complexes are funny.

by heresjohnny 2008-05-23 09:26AM | 0 recs
Re: CNN Breaking News: Obama/Clinton in Formal Tal

Completely vetted??? He's a former democratic president for godsake. Oh I'm sorry I forgot you don't think he's a democrat.

by ottovbvs 2008-05-23 07:20AM | 0 recs
Yes vetted. Or do you think they're above that

sort of thing? If they won't be vetted then Clinton won't get the spot.

by heresjohnny 2008-05-23 09:27AM | 0 recs
The VP Vetting Process
Both Clinton's will have to release all of their tax returns.
Also all information on donor's to their Library and foundation.
Also the source of speaking fees.
by parahammer 2008-05-23 05:39AM | 0 recs
Re: The VP Vetting Process
And maybe we can get Cindy McCain to release her tax returns as well?
Do you honestly think average voters are going to care who donated to Clinton's library? Rezko barely made a ripple in the press, and he's under indictment and standing trial right now.
As for the Foundation, it has done incredible work in Africa to fight against AIDS, providing affordable medicine, etc. If people are donating to the cause, all the better for them, don't you think?
by skohayes 2008-05-23 07:04AM | 0 recs
There is a vetting process. They have to

all go through it. It's not optional.

by heresjohnny 2008-05-23 09:32AM | 0 recs
Not that it really matters...

but that's a Bloomberg link.

Nothing about it on CNN yet.

by Massadonious 2008-05-23 05:41AM | 0 recs
Re: Not that it really matters...

the source is CNN however

by steve468 2008-05-23 05:42AM | 0 recs
Re: Not that it really matters...

Errr, I didn't read the entire article, silly me. It does say CNN there.

I wonder why this isn't on their main site, though.

by Massadonious 2008-05-23 05:42AM | 0 recs
You're right...

I've been watching CNN all morning, and even though there was a brief piece from (I think) Suzanne Malveaux saying that the two campaigns were in talks about an exit strategy for Sen. Clinton, I don't recall hearing anything specific about the VP slot.

by Liberal Monk 2008-05-23 06:22AM | 0 recs
Okay, now (10 :25 a.m. EST) the CNN pundits

...are talking about whether or not she should be offered the VP slot and are saying that the case that her folks are trying to make to the Obama folks is that she's earned it as a show of respect. Still not getting information on whether or not the Obama camp is open to the idea.

by Liberal Monk 2008-05-23 06:28AM | 0 recs
Humor me once today

Are they also in talks for a Clinton/Obama ticket?

(Ah, if only ...)

by Sieglinde 2008-05-23 05:43AM | 0 recs
rec'd.. consider yourself humored :)

I'm reminded of the lyrics to a Rolling Stones song.. "you can't always get what you want; but if you try, sometimes you get what you need."

The Democratic party is in serious need of reconciliation, something a unity ticket would instantly provide like nothing else could. Hillary's electoral strengths would have the added benefit of exponentially increasing the chances for a Democratic victory in Nov.

To me, this is a no brainer. Divided we stand; divided we fall. It's just that simple.

by phoenixdreamz 2008-05-23 05:53AM | 0 recs
Excuse me

United we stand; divided we fall.

Still waking up here, obviously :)

by phoenixdreamz 2008-05-23 05:58AM | 0 recs
Re: Excuse me

No. No. Only in America can a black man be forced to give into a white woman who has done everything possible to discredit him.

Absolutely not.

by sweet potato pie 2008-05-23 06:00AM | 0 recs
Respectfully sweet

I observed you call someone here a racist twice yesterday. Your perspective is so distorted, what you think matters not at all to me.

by phoenixdreamz 2008-05-23 06:09AM | 0 recs
Re: Excuse me
That's called a primary. Remember when John Kerry supporters ran an ad that morphed Howard Dean's face into Osama Bin Laden's?
It's only going to be worse in the GE.
by skohayes 2008-05-23 07:07AM | 0 recs
Re: rec'd.. consider yourself humored :)

A unity ticket will piss off a lot of Obama supporters.  It will be seen as appeasing Clinton.  IMO, she doesn't add anything to the ticket and she doesn't deserve to be on the ticket.  

The best way to reconcile is to have Clinton drop out of the race and support Obama.  She doesn't need to be a vp candidate to do this.

by Blue Neponset 2008-05-23 05:58AM | 0 recs
Re: rec'd.. consider yourself humored :)

Obama being the Dem nominee pisses alot of Clinton supporters off....

I think by saying "she doesn't deserve it" when quite infact it has been Senator Obama who has been   unable to assert his authority over this process despite hailing himself as the nominee since Iowa is his main problem.

The fact that though things look dire for Senator Clinton, she still gets a huge amount of votes. And is winning in the popular vote, or even if the Obamabots use their measure is within 2%

by Jaz 2008-05-23 06:03AM | 0 recs
Re: rec'd.. consider yourself humored :)

My point was, no matter what happens some people will be pissed off.  We can't please everyone so we shouldn't try.  

by Blue Neponset 2008-05-23 06:27AM | 0 recs
For the most part

the internet dosen't like Hillary. A substantial majority of the Democratic party at large sees things very differently, which the net roots have a bad habit of forgetting about and discounting. Polling on the subject of a unity ticket shows that a solid majority of Democratic voters strongly favor a unity ticket.

by phoenixdreamz 2008-05-23 06:05AM | 0 recs
Re: For the most part

The vast majority of Democrats will be unified behind Obama regardless of who his VP is.  The people who will walk away from the party if Clinton isn't on the ticket are minuscule in number and we can win this without them.  

I'll still vote for Obama no matter who his VP choice is but I might not give him as much money if Clinton is on the ticket.  Especially if my $$ is going to pay off her debts.  

You can't please everyone, therefore it is a mistake to try.  Obama should pick the person that adds most to the ticket.   I don't think that is Clinton.

by Blue Neponset 2008-05-23 06:21AM | 0 recs
Re: For the most part

Don't be too certain that the "vast majority" will unify under Obama.  Exit polls that show 32%-35% of Clinton supporters would vote McPain was validated yesterday by MSNBC which showed that 30% of dems in KY actually did crossed over to Bush 2004 over Kerry.

I will vote for the Democratic nominee but am not convinced that the non-netroot dem will.

by wasanyonehurt 2008-05-23 06:32AM | 0 recs
Re: For the most part

It is five months + until the GE.  That 32-35% will dwindle down to almost nothing before November.  If it doesn't then we deserve to lose.  

by Blue Neponset 2008-05-23 06:49AM | 0 recs
Re: For the most part

Do you get the point that "30% of KY Democratic voters switched to Bush over Kerry"?

You live in a fantasy world if you think it dwindles to "nothing"

And NO, "we don't deserve to lose" if he can't carry those crossovers. . . without serious overtures to Clinton and her supporters, the fault will lie with Obama.

by wasanyonehurt 2008-05-23 06:56AM | 0 recs
Re: For the most part

Hey, have I insulted you?  If I did it was unintentional, and I apologize.  So please stop with the fucking insults.  

Do you get the point that "30% of KY Democratic voters switched to Bush over Kerry"?

KY will not be in play in November. Regardless of who is on the D ticket.  As a result, I don't put too much stock in what turncoat Democrats do in that state.  

And NO, "we don't deserve to lose" if he can't carry those crossovers. . . without serious overtures to Clinton and her supporters, the fault will lie with Obama.

There isn't a good reason for a Democrat to not vote for Obama in November.  The vast majority of Democrats will realize this and do the right thing.  That is why I don't worry about the die hards.  They either can't be reached or they will do what is right because it is simply the right thing to do.

by Blue Neponset 2008-05-23 07:10AM | 0 recs
Re: rec'd.. consider yourself humored :)

Your sounding "Bitter" We don't need that, we need unity, she can bring everything to this race. He needs her supporters, without them he is sunk. BTW: Clinton supporters are very faithful to her, and will stick with her always. Remember that!

by steve468 2008-05-23 06:08AM | 0 recs
Re: rec'd.. consider yourself humored :)

I am bitter.  Actions should have consequences.   Clinton shouldn't be rewarded for staying in the race two months too long.  

BTW: Clinton supporters are very faithful to her, and will stick with her always. Remember that!

Leave!!  Go vote for McCain. We will win this without your help.  Stop pretending anyone gives a shit about your threats.  We don't.  Take your ball and go home.

by Blue Neponset 2008-05-23 06:24AM | 0 recs
Re: rec'd.. consider yourself humored :)

"IMO, she doesn't add anything to the ticket and she doesn't deserve to be on the ticket. "

As an Obama supporter, I respectfully disagree.  Hillary can help deliver Arkansas, Florida and Ohio based on a lot of polling information out there.  While I think Obama can win without carrying any of those states, I don't really want to test that theory if its not necessary.  Our party is split 51/49 in it's choice for candidate and for all Obama's talk about building a broader base..this would be a good start IMHO.  

by lex75 2008-05-23 06:42AM | 0 recs
See the DK threads...

...this looks like more agitprop from CNN.

She wants the VP, but the decision is Obama's to make. And I don't think he'll make it in her favor.

by Firewall 2008-05-23 05:47AM | 0 recs
Re: See the DK threads...

With all those delegates that she has in her pocket, she could get just about anything she wants, unless they want a fight on their hands, which I don't believe they do. Lets see what happens

by steve468 2008-05-23 05:55AM | 0 recs
Re: See the DK threads...

No she can't because this will be determined by the superdelegates. Her bargaining power has long since diminished.

by sweet potato pie 2008-05-23 06:00AM | 0 recs
If her delegates were as

many as you imply they are, she'd be on top of the ticket, instead of begging for a spot at the bottom.

by Firewall 2008-05-23 06:04AM | 0 recs
Re: If her delegates were as

1800 and counting. Yes that is many according to the Obama math.

by steve468 2008-05-23 06:09AM | 0 recs
It's not enough.

If it were, she'd be offering Obama the VP slot, instead of being denied it. :^)

by Firewall 2008-05-23 06:11AM | 0 recs
Let me just clear something up here...

...With over 1,500 delegates at the Democratic National Convention, Hillary can influence a lot of things in Denver.

She can influence the platform and yes, she can influence whom the Vice Presidential nominee is.

For anyone to sit behind their computer and poo poo more than 1,500 delegates obviously doesn't know how the Democratic Party functions.

by Andre Walker 2008-05-23 06:18AM | 0 recs
Tantrums don't change reality.

The loser doesn't pick the copilot of the winner.

by Firewall 2008-05-23 06:21AM | 0 recs
And you fail to realize that...

...A candidate for the Democratic vice presidential nomination needs a majority of the delegates (pledged or otherwise) to become the nominee.

If Hillary walks into the Convention with the same number of delegates she has now, she could force her way onto the ticket and the unpledged delegates could give her the boost she needs to clinch the vice presidential nomination.

You see, when it comes down to the vice presidential nomination, it's a whole 'nother vote entirely.

Hillary has the delegate votes to place her name into nomination to be the Democratic candidate for the Office of Vice President of the United States.  And she can get it if she holds all her pledged delegates in line and convinces enough unpledged delegates to support her cause.

The simple fact is that the unpledged delegates are saying they will vote for Sen. Obama on the first ballot.  They didn't say a damn thing about whom they would vote for, for vice president meaning that all the unpledged delegates are fair game.

by Andre Walker 2008-05-23 06:36AM | 0 recs
This is fantasy.

The winner gets to pick the VP. The loser doesn't. If you have to rely on arguments of floor fights at the convention and "unpledged delegates are fair game", you're deep in the hypothetical forest.

In the meantime (in the real world), the race is done, and Obama's busy vetting his ABC VPs. Clinton knows this, and is telling her supporters what they want to hear (that she still has a chance somewhere on the ticket), all the while waiting for her campaign to break even again.

She's spinning you guys. You shouldn't fall for this.

by Firewall 2008-05-23 06:39AM | 0 recs
The Rules Say That The Convention...

...Picks the Vice Presidential nominee.

by Andre Walker 2008-05-23 06:43AM | 0 recs
Re: And you fail to realize that...

" And she can get it if she holds all her pledged delegates in line and convinces enough unpledged delegates to support her cause."

Yes, and if a frog had wings, he wouldn't bump his ass when he hops.

It'll never happen.  It would be a disaster for her to try and force it if Obama didn't want it.  It would weaken him and make her look like an idiot, and hurt our chances this Fall.

Just let it go, already...

by Lawyerish 2008-05-23 06:44AM | 0 recs
This better be a mere formality

Because I would be very, very angry if her "I'll hold my breath until I pass out" tactics actually netted her anything.

by Dracomicron 2008-05-23 05:47AM | 0 recs
Re: CNN Breaking News: Obama/Clinton in Formal Tal

They are in talks for her to drop out. The part about her getting VP as part of the deal is just pure speculation on the part of CNN, most likely passing along talking points from President Clinton

by Lost Thought 2008-05-23 05:49AM | 0 recs
Re: CNN Breaking News: Obama/Clinton in Formal Tal

Come on! Hillary isn't going to just drop out now, unless something is in it for her. Let's get real!

by steve468 2008-05-23 05:56AM | 0 recs
There is something in it for her

Like, the respect of Democrats.  Perhaps the world.

She can't prove herself any further than she already has at this point.

by Dracomicron 2008-05-23 06:04AM | 0 recs
Re: CNN Breaking News: Obama/Clinton in Formal Tal

He can give her rules changes at the convention, to make more states have primaries and adjust the calander. That would be a more traditional consolation prize anyways. And she always has some debt which could be taken care of with a quick dip into Obama's swimming pools of cash :)

by Lost Thought 2008-05-23 06:05AM | 0 recs
Re: CNN Breaking News: Obama/Clinton in Formal Tal

Traditional yes...however this nomination is very very close, closer in fact than any of those traditional cases. The party is split on who they like better. Picking both is the logical choice, and politically it's a good choice too.

by nyarch 2008-05-23 07:37AM | 0 recs
Re: CNN Breaking News: Obama/Clinton in Formal Tal

Yeah, this. And the whole thing is apparently sourced pretty much exclusively from anonymous sources inside the Clinton campaign, so I don't put a lot of weight on this as anything but a signal that she may finally be getting ready for an exit.

by werehippy 2008-05-23 05:56AM | 0 recs
Re: CNN Breaking News: Obama/Clinton in Formal Tal

I am praying that this will not happen.  

This election is a once in a lifetime opportunity to change the way things are done in Washington.  Having Clinton on the ticket will take something unique and make it ordinary.  She isn't an agent for change.  

by Blue Neponset 2008-05-23 05:52AM | 0 recs
Re: CNN Breaking News: Obama/Clinton in Formal Tal

eh, Obama wants to show he can bring change, its not only about changing of the guards, he has to show he can make change happen even while working with others who aren't inline with him.

I will wait and see how all this develops, I just don't know about Obama/Clinton

by TruthMatters 2008-05-23 05:56AM | 0 recs
Re: CNN Breaking News: Obama/Clinton in Formal Tal

Clinton is the personification of what needs to change.  If he embraces her that would really damage his message.  

There are plenty of other people who aren't inline with Obama that he can work with to show that he can bring change.

by Blue Neponset 2008-05-23 06:07AM | 0 recs
Re: CNN Breaking News: Obama/Clinton in Formal Tal

Change from Bush--not Democrats, MAN!

by Check077 2008-05-23 06:21AM | 0 recs
Grow up

Obama is no agent for change either.  God - you really believe he is different?  There will come a day when you look in the mirror and understand Obama is just another politician and you have been had.

by emmasaint 2008-05-23 05:58AM | 0 recs
Re: Grow up

Like the day he becomes inaugurated? Or, how about the day he enacts his health care plan? Or, better yet, how about the day he enacts a plan to pull our troops out of Iraq?

I'll look in the mirror each and every one of those days and say: "Glad I voted for him."

by Massadonious 2008-05-23 06:02AM | 0 recs
Re: Grow this

He is enough of an agent of change to kick Hillary's & the Clinton Machine's collective ass.  

by Blue Neponset 2008-05-23 06:03AM | 0 recs
Re: Grow this

Why does he even need to discuss VP with her if he's such an all-powerful, bad-ass.

Perceived weakness.  A belief that those 32% of Hillary supporters who vow to vote McPain will follow through on their threat as confirmed by MSNBC.

I will vote for the Dem nominee but will they?

by wasanyonehurt 2008-05-23 06:44AM | 0 recs
Re: Grow this

He isn't an all-powerful bad-ass, he is just a politician.   You shouldn't put too much stalk in the Obama as Messiah talking point.  It isn't true.

I will vote for the Dem nominee but will they?

The vast majority will.  The opinions of the ones that don't are not worth considering.  

by Blue Neponset 2008-05-23 06:57AM | 0 recs
Both Are Dems

Having a Democrat in the White House would be a major change. So in that sense, both are agents of change.

I do think Obama is less beholden to certain entrenched interests and bad influences within the party (i.e. the DLC, people like Mark Penn) than Clinton. But most of us aren't stupid enough to think that he's anything but a politician.

by Hatch 2008-05-23 06:05AM | 0 recs
Oh, I see. We've had so many women

VicePresidents throughout our history that having another one would be soooo ordinary:

Having Clinton on the ticket will take something unique and make it ordinary.

Do you know how ridiculous that sounds?

by Rumarhazzit 2008-05-23 08:29AM | 0 recs
Re: CNN Breaking News: Obama/Clinton in Formal Tal

The first real female candidate for president is an agent of change. O.K. I'll have my check please!

by northstars 2008-05-23 08:43AM | 0 recs
Re: CNN Breaking News: Obama/Clinton in Formal Tal

"isn't" an agent of change. Sorry.

by northstars 2008-05-23 08:44AM | 0 recs
I actually could see it happening

I would NOT rule it out.

Even Obama did say that he believes that his Vice President and Cabinet may be a "Team of Rivals".

by puma 2008-05-23 05:53AM | 0 recs
Re: I actually could see it happening

Yes! and the same thing happened with Kennedy. He chose his arch rival Johnson, and the ticket turned out to be the big winner against Nixon

by steve468 2008-05-23 05:57AM | 0 recs
Re: I actually could see it happening

He barely won that election.  It wasn't a big win.  

by Blue Neponset 2008-05-23 05:59AM | 0 recs
Re: I actually could see it happening

Tell Kennedy family that wasn't a big win. Your not getting the message. Two candidates you may have sour feelings for one another, can unite for a common cause. Looks like it may happen, so get use to it.

by steve468 2008-05-23 06:13AM | 0 recs
Exactly, Steve...

...A win is a win and sometimes you've got to suck it up and work with someone you don't like to accomplish the big goal.

Excuse my bad grammar, but Obama ain't winning without Hillary's voters.  Put Hillary on the ticket and call it a day.

And for all you folks whining and crying about, "But if Clinton is on the ticket, it'll diminish Obama's message of change."

Wah, Wah, Wah, cry me a river.  You can't get more change than having a black man and white female running for President and Vice President.  That, in itself, is the epitome of change.

So stop with trying to keep Obama ideologically pure, get behind Obama/Clinton and let's prepare for victory in November.

by Andre Walker 2008-05-23 06:23AM | 0 recs
Re: Exactly, Steve...

There are plenty of white females not named Hillary Clinton.  

by Blue Neponset 2008-05-23 06:30AM | 0 recs
Re: Exactly, Steve...

Did any of them finish with almost half of the votes in the 2008 Democratic primaries?!

by northstars 2008-05-23 08:46AM | 0 recs
Nuts to that

I will fight my damnedest to keep Obama as "ideologically pure" as possible.

Winning is worthless if we become the enemy.

by Dracomicron 2008-05-23 06:45AM | 0 recs
Re: Nuts to that

You lost that battle before it ever started.  He is a politician through and through. In some ways good, in some ways great, and mostly pretty average.

by nyarch 2008-05-23 07:40AM | 0 recs
Fine

He's still not going to bow to pressure when it comes to putting Clinton on the ticket.  I don't care if it's ideology or practicality or both.  That's enough for now.  We'll keep the other stuff in mind for later.

by Dracomicron 2008-05-23 08:53AM | 0 recs
Re: Fine

We shall see.  He may not bow...but he does not have enough delegates to stop her if she pushes.  The concept of picking a vp is based on an undisputed winner, at best Obama will be seen as just barely winning, most likely he will be seen as having won only in delegates and not the popular vote.  

by nyarch 2008-05-23 11:23AM | 0 recs
Not actually factual

There's nothing that suggests that the VP choice has anything to do with delegates.

He'll have the majority of all delegates.  THAT is the only thing that counts going into the convention.  If he just had a plurality of the delegates, and somehow John Edward's coalition was putting him over the top, you could perhaps argue this point if Edwards agreed with Clinton on the issue.

Thankfully, Edwards seems to think that Obama is doing a good job and doesn't need her on the ticket.

by Dracomicron 2008-05-23 12:11PM | 0 recs
Re: Not actually factual

It has everything to do with delegates. The convention nominates the vp. It just happens that in our lifetime the nominee has enough delegates to pick who he chooses. In this case he is nowhere near enough pledged delegates to win, let alone pick whomever he wants for vp.  It is the supers that will  put him over the top, nothing more and nothing less.    There is nothing at all that says those same supers couldn't or wouldn't vote for her for vp if she asked/pushed.  Given that a number of her former friends and supporters are his supers it is quite plausible that they and other reluctant Obama supporters would back her for vp.  He needs 2026(not including MI and FL) for prez...He needs the same number for his vp choice. There is a strong chance that she could muster that number with supers for her as vp.

by nyarch 2008-05-23 12:30PM | 0 recs
She could, but she won't.

Obama is only 50 delegates or so away from the nomination.  With the upcoming contests, he'll get those easily.

Further, supers have NOT been breaking for her.

by Dracomicron 2008-05-23 01:02PM | 0 recs
Re: She could, but she won't.

My point was not about him getting the nomination. In all likely hood he will and it will be supers that do it for him. My point was that many of those supers may see voting for her as vp as an attempt at party unity.  There are several SD that are still quite loyal to Clinton and are only backing Obama because of the math or their districts.  It is not a stretch to think that she could find enough sd to vote for her as vp even though they are voting for Obama for prez.

by nyarch 2008-05-23 01:47PM | 0 recs
Re: Nuts to that

Were you in The Weathermen? Is it you Mr. Ayres?

by northstars 2008-05-23 08:47AM | 0 recs
The Weathermen were idiots

Black Panthers all the way!

Just kidding.

by Dracomicron 2008-05-23 08:51AM | 0 recs
Re: I actually could see it happening

Stop pretending that having Johnson on the ticket resulted in a "big win".  It didn't.  Kennedy barely won in 1960.  

Also, if Hillary is on the ticket you should get used to the idea that Obama supporters don't respond well to spin.  If you want to reach us you shouldn't exaggerate.  We don't respond well to that.  

by Blue Neponset 2008-05-23 07:01AM | 0 recs
Re: I actually could see it happening

LBJ brought home Texas and that's what it took.

by northstars 2008-05-23 08:48AM | 0 recs
Right

Hillary is to Obama as LBJ was to JFK. So if Obama really wants to emulate Kennedy, picking his rival might be the way to go.

I think there are good reasons to have Hillary on the ticket, and good reasons not to have Hillary on the ticket. As Bowers pointed out yesterday, there are good reasons to believe an Obama/Clinton ticket would be virtually unbeatable and could usher in gigantic majorities in the House and Senate. On the other hand, the GOP would have the opportunity to attack Obama in the more pro-Clinton states and attack Clinton in the more pro-Obama states. I'm not sure which outweighs the other, but after the Childers race I'm not sure the GOP attacks are going to have much of an effect this year anyway.

by Hatch 2008-05-23 06:00AM | 0 recs
Re: Right

This may be true, but it is the president we vote for, not his running mate. So I'm not sure that a VP would have that much effect either way.

by steve468 2008-05-23 06:15AM | 0 recs
VP...

...is probably on Clinton's "short list" of things that she would accept in exchange for dropping out.  According to the report over at TPM, there are three options being discussed.  Clearly VP is at the top of the list.

Question is, what else could be on that list?  What are the other two?  Attorney General?  SCOTUS?  Senate Majority Leader?  Secretary of HHS?  I'm just spitballing here....

by mascho 2008-05-23 05:55AM | 0 recs
Paying Off Debts

That would undoubtedly be on the list.

by Hatch 2008-05-23 06:01AM | 0 recs
Can't really do that...

...At least not directly.

The best Obama could do is help her fundraise to pay off her debts but... quite honestly, she spent $3 million last month on Penn's firm.  I'm not sure we should care about anything other than her small vendors.

by Dracomicron 2008-05-23 06:07AM | 0 recs
This Hillary supporter believes

that Senate Majority Leader is actually more important than VP.  I would love to see it go that route because lets face it:  Unless the senate is coming up with Universal Healthcare legislation,  the President's stance on the subject will be irrelevant.  Who better to be at the helm of this issue than Hillary?  

I can see it happening:  Hillary gets busy right away doing all the things we have been wanting.  Obama signs off on bills as President.  Its a win-win.  

However, the VP spot brings unity to the ticket and gets us in office in the first place.  So I see the advantages of both.

by Sandy1938 2008-05-23 06:13AM | 0 recs
Re: This Hillary supporter believes

pretty sure Sen. Reid has something to say about that, I didn't know he was stepping down anytime soon.

by TruthMatters 2008-05-23 06:15AM | 0 recs
I Have Heard

Isn't there a very strong rumor that Reid doesn't intend to serve as Majority Leader again?

Also just crossed my mind, wouldn't Obama probably prefer Chris Dodd or Dick Durbin as Majority Leader?

by Hatch 2008-05-23 06:50AM | 0 recs
Re: This Hillary supporter believes

And for her to be VP, would set the stage for another run in 2016 when she is 68 years old. Or if Obama should lose the GE, she could run in 2012. Either way, I'm sure we haven't seen the last of Hillary Clinton on the national stage.

by steve468 2008-05-23 06:18AM | 0 recs
Re: This Hillary supporter believes

Come on! Senate Majority Leader more important than VP?! One is a heart beat away from the presidency and next in line to run for the presidency. That is just silly.

by northstars 2008-05-23 08:51AM | 0 recs
I believe it is more important

substantively, because its the Senate Majority leader who sets the legislation agenda that will move through the senate, and eventually become law.  The VP slot seems more ceremonial to me.

by Sandy1938 2008-05-23 10:19AM | 0 recs
Re: Another thought

It is going to be Hillary, forget about those other names. She is the logical choice.

by steve468 2008-05-23 05:59AM | 0 recs
No

No she isn't the logical choice. What is wrong with you. Hillary lost my respect with that "as far as I know" and CIC crap. Absolutely not and I believe that she asked and was told no which is why she acted the way she did in Florida and why all of the sudden the Clinton campaign is "leaking" this stuff. They are trying to blackmail their way onto the ticket.

What Hillary should have done was what John Edwards did, drop out earlier on so you look like a good sport and then get offered the ticket. This will backfire.

by sweet potato pie 2008-05-23 06:04AM | 0 recs
Don't get riled up;

some Clinton supporters think by writing "Clinton will be VP" over and over again, their wills will be done.

by Firewall 2008-05-23 06:06AM | 0 recs
Re: Get Over it!

No one really cares what any of us think. If their holding formal talks, then something is coming down before long, and it isn't Hillary dropping out, and saying "Good-Luck Obama" See you around some time. Stop living in fantasy land.

by steve468 2008-05-23 06:19AM | 0 recs
Re: Another thought

Nope. Obama already told her no.

http://ruralvotes.com/thefield/?p=1248

by catilinus 2008-05-23 06:05AM | 0 recs
There are plenty of candidates

All with pluses and minuses.  Clinton has high disapproval ratings and does not do well with Independants.  

by xenontab 2008-05-23 06:15AM | 0 recs
Re: CNN Breaking News

This could help woo Dems tough on security issues with her stance on Iran being a polar opposite of his.  But honestly, this seems to be like Adams/Jefferson IMO.

by kydem 2008-05-23 05:59AM | 0 recs
Not Easley

He is a bubba and not that smart of one.  He has been a good Governor of NC, but he shuns the spotlight, doesn't like to make appearances etc..very under the radar...completely unsuited to be VP - a good ol' boy....

by emmasaint 2008-05-23 05:59AM | 0 recs
Re: CNN Breaking News: Obama/Clinton in Formal Tal

I would guess ( emphasis on guess) that if they are talking several things are on the table.

First and foremost: FL & MI. She has made such a big a deal out of this it has to be at the top of the list. She knows all to well she may lose this fight at the DNC meeting on 31st. So better for the two campaigns to come into the meeting with an agreement.

Second, her debt. Working out some arrangement where Obama helps Clinton raise money to at least pay off her vendors. Not sure about the money she loaned herself.

Third, the VP slot. This will be a tough one. During the vetting process, Bill is going to have to release all types of info, which he maybe loath to do, to the Obama camp.

by jsfox 2008-05-23 06:02AM | 0 recs
Re: CNN Breaking News: Obama/Clinton in Formal Tal

The 3rd one is at the top of the list. I had heard that she has the May 31 meeting in her pocket. According to her campaign, they have enough votes on the committee to seat the delegates and give her the popular votes. She is on track to win the popular vote after June 3. She netted 150,000 votes from Tuesday's primary contests.

by steve468 2008-05-23 06:24AM | 0 recs
Re: CNN Breaking News: Obama/Clinton in Formal Tal

Well that's one school of thought.

However I wouldn't be so sure she has the votes for the May 31st meet.  

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/article s/2008/05/friends_may_seal_clintons_fate .html

I also wouldn't be to sure she holds the popular vote. Montana and SD are likely Obama wins. Please note I said likely. Nothing is set in stone this primary season.

Also I think PR is more up in the air than people think.  There has been no reliable polling out of there to date.

However, in the case of PR this is one primary where the popular vote can be honestly discounted no matter who wins it. They have no vote in the GE.

Disclaimer : these are merely opinions and not facts ;)

by jsfox 2008-05-23 06:42AM | 0 recs
Re: CNN Breaking News: Obama/Clinton in Formal Tal

May 23 (Bloomberg) -- U.S. Senator Hillary Clinton's presidential campaign is in formal talks with Senator Barack Obama's campaign about becoming his vice presidential running mate, CNN reported, without citing anyone specific.

The two Democratic campaigns are talking about ways for Clinton, from New York, to drop her bid for president that may include joining the Illinois senator's ticket, CNN reported. Talks are in a ``very preliminary'' stage and are described as ``difficult,'' the network said.

To contact the reporter on this story: Chris Dolmetsch in New York at cdolmetsch@bloomberg.net.
Last Updated: May 23, 2008 08:21 EDT

by Andre X 2008-05-23 06:04AM | 0 recs
Seven Years of Finances need to be vetted, first

by Andre X 2008-05-23 06:06AM | 0 recs
Re: Obama/Clinton in Formal Talks For VP

Though I think she ran a despicable campaign and mostly connects with the racist, uneducated, low information and easily misled voters in the country...

I am fine with the joint ticket IF it helps put Obama in the Whitehouse in November.  (I am not yet convinced it will)  He speaks of change.  She is anti-change.  He want to talk to Iran. She wants to obliterate Iran.  He wants to stop the "silliness" in Washington.  She is Queen Silliness Panderer.

by rf7777 2008-05-23 06:09AM | 0 recs
Re: Obama/Clinton in Formal Talks For VP

At no point did the campaign go after the racist vote.

It was however, the Obama campaign who said "race was an issue" - and well, if it becomes apparent White people are voting for you, so be it.

There's nothing wrong with uneducated, low-information voters - Why do you think the Democrats keep on losing to Republicans?

Silly liberal keep dimissing these voters...

by Jaz 2008-05-23 06:12AM | 0 recs
Re: Obama/Clinton in Formal Talks For VP

I have to heavily disagree there... they've been trying to drive a wedge between whites and blacks since SC...

That being said Hillary has also run a positive campaign and appealed to a lot of good people...

We should not smear everyone with a broad brush

by CaptainMorgan 2008-05-23 06:54AM | 0 recs
Re: Obama/Clinton in Formal Talks For VP

And then we come back to the memo in which Obama's team clearly stated that they would play up the race issue and blame Clinton for it.

by nyarch 2008-05-23 07:50AM | 0 recs
Re: Obama/Clinton in Formal Talks For VP

"racist, uneducated, low information and easily misled voters in the country"

This statement is racist, uneducated, and teeming in low information.

by Sieglinde 2008-05-23 06:14AM | 0 recs
Re: Obama/Clinton in Formal Talks For VP

Get over it. She ran a fantastic campaign and made political history. It is hurtful and ridiculous to label Dem voters as you have, you sound like a "Bitter" person.

Try living in the real world for a change. You talk about racist. Well, guess what, the world is full of racists, they live in every sector of society. Race is and will continue to be a problem in this country. Who is misleading who? Obama hasn't exactly been an ideal or saintly figure.

by steve468 2008-05-23 06:28AM | 0 recs
Re: Obama/Clinton in Formal Talks For VP

"She ran a fantastic campaign."  You're right, Hillary can do no wrong."  Can you at least admit that Obama ran the better campaign? Can you?

by reggie23 2008-05-23 06:56AM | 0 recs
Re: Obama/Clinton in Formal Talks For VP

He was better the first half, she has been better the second half.

by nyarch 2008-05-23 07:51AM | 0 recs
Re: Obama/Clinton in Formal Talks For VP

That's a fair answer.  But if you don't mind me quoting a Nike commercial, don't you agree that Obama's better was better than Clinton's better?

by reggie23 2008-05-23 09:57AM | 0 recs
Re: Obama/Clinton in Formal Talks For VP

He kicked ass in the caucus states for sure but I don't think I'd agree with you.  He came off of the best month humanly possible in Feb and he wasn't able to close.  He had six more weeks before PA and he couldn't close.  If she had been like the from the start I don't think his best could have stood up.  This is of course all opinion.

by nyarch 2008-05-23 11:19AM | 0 recs
Re: Obama/Clinton in Formal Talks For VP

Once again, a fair reply, and your right that If there were a redo with what we know now (No Penn, focus on all states, plan for the rest of February), Obama probably wouldn't stand a chance.  Then can we both agree with this horribly written stance: Hillary's worser was worser then Obama's worser.    

by reggie23 2008-05-23 11:30AM | 0 recs
Re: Obama/Clinton in Formal Talks For VP

Yes we can agree, both on who horrible that sentence was, and it's content.

by nyarch 2008-05-23 11:38AM | 0 recs
This means Clinton will be the VP nominee

I assume, of course, that Sen Obama wants to be the president.  

by ann0nymous 2008-05-23 06:14AM | 0 recs
Re: CNN Reports: Obama/Clinton in Formal

The only way it would work is if Bill Clinton stays in the background.  Bill should stay talking with rural and older voters.  Chelsea could help Obama like she did with her mother.  If the Clintons put as much heart and time in Obama's campaign as they did Hillarys, the democrats should win.  The one big obstacle is Hillary will have to quit taking money from lobbyist, and she will have to get Bill to tell his foreign buddies good-bye.

by Spanky 2008-05-23 06:16AM | 0 recs
True, or simply media trying to make news?

I really find it hard to believe that Hillary would be in the mood to negotiate a possible veep pick. She's still in nomination mood. It really seems as though CNN has moved to general election mode, which focuses on the veep pick until its announcement. And, we all know how the media can make things up based on removed sources.

Does a Clinton veep pick really help the Democratic Party? Don't consider for a second if it can happen based on the personalities and relationships of both Obama and Clinton. Consider these pros and cons...

Pros: unify party easily and quickly, ensure that Bill and Hillary are fully on board with the general election campaign, increase appeal to women and working class.

Cons: potential overshadowing of the presidential nominee, no addition of swing state appeal, increased linkage to the negative parts of the Clinton years.

I'm not in the crowd that will completely reject the concept of a joint ticket. But such a ticket does carry baggage.

by irish09 2008-05-23 06:21AM | 0 recs
Re: True, or simply media trying to make news?

A part of me would rather Hillary go back to the Senate if Obama is the nominee.  She could make such a great mark for herself there.  She really could be the next Ted Kennedy.  I see the VP as a step down for her.  I really do.

On the other, I see some pros.  First, Obama gets Bill Clinton as a surrogate, which would be helpful.  Second, the party will unite almost instantly.  I, for one, would go from merely voting for Obama, to enthusiastically volunteering for the campaign.

Third, imagine the visual at Obama's first State of the Union Address.  A black man giving the speech and sitting behind him are the two most powerful women in American politics.  What a powerful image for children of color and young women.

Wow.

by psychodrew 2008-05-23 06:38AM | 0 recs
Re: True, or simply media trying to make news?

Funny, I would love to say the converse that Obama would make a great mark for himself in the Senate if he were to return there, but unfortunately his US Senate track record shows nothing that makes me equally confident as your confidence in Senator Clinton.

by wasanyonehurt 2008-05-23 06:48AM | 0 recs
Re: True, or simply media trying to make news?

He might be a good legislator.  He wasn't there too long before jumping into the presidential race.  I guess we'll never know.

What do you think about this, as a Hillary supporter?  Voting for Obama would be much easier for me if Hillary were on the ticket, but I see the VP as a step down for her.

by psychodrew 2008-05-23 06:54AM | 0 recs
Re: CNN Reports:

historically, the VEEP nominee really doesn't influence very many votes.

God, I wish we had a third choice. I really don't like Obama or McCain. The two-party system is a joke.

by WolfmanJack 2008-05-23 06:26AM | 0 recs
Re: CNN Reports:

both Nader and Bob Barr are also running you have 4 choices,

maybe your problem is you consider all the other actual parties as jokes.

by TruthMatters 2008-05-23 06:27AM | 0 recs
Re: CNN Reports:

Nader and Barr. Now there is a real twosome. God forbid.

by steve468 2008-05-23 06:31AM | 0 recs
Re: CNN Reports:

no only the candidates.  

Our elections are such a media-driven circus, it is a wonder we have any halfway decent candidates. I will say that. But it is always a "lesser-of-two-evils" choice, not really a matter of voting FOR someone.

by WolfmanJack 2008-05-23 06:57AM | 0 recs
Re: CNN Reports:

The choices aren't legitimate.  How much do you want to bet that only two of those four candidates are invited to nationally televised debates.  

by reggie23 2008-05-23 07:00AM | 0 recs
Re: CNN Reports:

both Nader and Bob Barr are also running you have 4 choices,

maybe your problem is you consider all the other actual parties as jokes.

by TruthMatters 2008-05-23 06:27AM | 0 recs
For me, there are only two choices:

John McBush III or not-John McBush III.

100 years of war OR not 100 years of war.
4 more years of ignoring enemies and alienating our allies OR 4 years of reaching to our friends and foes.
More Scalias on the Supreme Court OR more Breyers on the Supreme Court.

For me, it's easy.  I will vote for whomever has a (D) next to his or her name.  I would love for it to be Hillary, but if it's Barack, I will happily vote for him.

by psychodrew 2008-05-23 06:51AM | 0 recs
Re: CNN Reports:

Slow news day?

Marge: "GrandPa, are you sitting on the pie?"
GrandPa: "I sure hope so..."

by xdem 2008-05-23 06:36AM | 0 recs
Obama supporters in this thread make me LMFAO.

Talk about talking out of both sides of your faces.

There's a ton of comments in this thread discussing "dirt" on Bill Clinton, by people who constantly feign moral outrage at the very mention of anything negative about Obama, and who read negative comments into pro-Clinton diaries where they don't even exist, causing them to attack the diarists and attempt to destroy their credibility on this website (Alegre, Texas Darlin, etc.).

Where are all your claims that this is a Democratic blog and by even attempting to "vett" or "dish dirt" on our candidates, we are harming our own party, and do not belong on a Democratic blog?

Shoe just doesn't fit as well on the other foot or something, you total freaking hypocrites?

by PJ Jefferson 2008-05-23 06:50AM | 0 recs
Make that SOME Obama supporters in this thread nt.

by PJ Jefferson 2008-05-23 06:51AM | 0 recs
Glad I spotted your sig line

Not suprising, and kind of confirmed suspicions I had anyways. Whichever way site traffic wind is blowing.. triangulation indeed.

by phoenixdreamz 2008-05-23 06:58AM | 0 recs
Halperin and Giordano report: CNN is full of shit.

Obama strategist David Axelrod on MSNBC's "Morning Joe" said they haven't engaged in any talks with Clinton about Veep, other negotiations.

http://thepage.time.com/the-pages-full-c overage-of-the-friday-morning-shows-2/

The Field can now confirm, based on multiple sources, something that both campaigns publicly deny: that Senator Clinton has directly told Senator Obama that she wants to be his vice presidential nominee, and that Senator Obama politely but straightforwardly and irrevocably said "no." Obama is going to pick his own running mate based on his own criteria and vetting process.

http://ruralvotes.com/thefield/?p=1248

by CrazyDrumGuy 2008-05-23 06:52AM | 0 recs
Re: CNN Reports: Obama/Clinton in Formal Talks For

she will make a major mistake by agreeing to do so.

by engels 2008-05-23 06:56AM | 0 recs
Re: CNN Reports: Obama/Clinton in Formal Talks For

Why would it be a mistake,  is she not ready for the job?

You nutcases need to show a little more respect to the honor of public service.

The Presidency is not the most important job in America.

by CrushTheGOP2008 2008-05-23 07:33AM | 0 recs
Re: CNN Reports: Obama/Clinton in Formal Talks For
i am not talking with people doing personal insults.
all i can say - go to hell
by engels 2008-05-23 08:15AM | 0 recs
Re: CNN Reports: Obama/Clinton in Formal Talks For

Clinton as VP would doom the Democratic ticket.  Clinton represents everything that Obama has campaigned against:  lobbyists, influence-peddling, corruption, and DC "business-as-usual".

HRC as VP would entirely destroy Obama's credibility, and besmirch is blue mantle of CHANGE.

Thus, you will see that Hillary will be rejected for VP, and rightly so.

http://hillaryis404.org

by baghdadjoe 2008-05-23 07:26AM | 0 recs
It's Too Logical to ever Happen
And it will happen over Michelle Obama's dead body!
Hillary brings so many pluses to the ticket. She is no Dan Quayle!
by hypopg 2008-05-23 07:35AM | 0 recs
This is what I think will happen

Obama will agree to fundraise for Hillary to help pay off her debts.  He will offer her something interesting, cabinet position etc., Hillary will make a public statement that Obama offered her the position and she declined

Obama will confirm that this is true (the offer and the decline).  He will wait a couple of weeks before making an alternate selection.

by Sychotic1 2008-05-23 07:43AM | 0 recs
Re: CNN Reports: Obama/Clinton in Formal Talks For

First off, to anyone who is saying we should "vet" the Clintons, you are as good as the Republican shit that roam around Free Republic. Bill Clinton was the first Democrat to serve and be elected to two full terms since Franklin Roosevelt.(don't give me that Perot myth shit, exit polls and common sense about his pro-choice pro-gay stances show he only stopped Clinton from a majority in '92 and '96) he also cleaned up our party image, as from 1968-1988, we were "soft on crime," and the party of welfare, and seen as the big spenders who didn't balance budgets. We had no economic cred, in part thanks to Carter. Bill Clinton cleaned that up. We used to average 113 electoral votes from 1968-1988 because of those issues. Bill Clinton changed that, as he took GOP leaning states like MI, CA, CT, ME, NM, NH, IL, DE, PA, VT, and even NJ and turned them solid blue. New Jersey, of all states, used to always go Republican until Bill Clinton came along, along with California. All of the states I mentioned all total 155 electoral votes. We've made the GOP actually have to fight in the recent elections, and we won in 2000, they GOP had to STEAL it to get the White House, and they barely kept the White House in 2004, only because of a war going on, and a terrible candidate. So goddamit, show Bill Clinton honor. If we were still the party of welfare, crime, and deficits, a guy like Obama would never be running. Crime and welfare were intentionally used to scapegoat blacks. People like Obama were the victim. But now because those issues were neutralized on the Presidential scale by Clinton, Obama can run. Also, he does not need to be "vetted," because of all of the above reasons to honor him, AND because they have already been so. They were CLEARED on Whitewater 3 times, Foster, Travel"gate", and other stuff they were all CLEARED on! NOT GUILTY! GET IT?! So what if Bill pardoned a few people? He can pardon anyone he wants to, its not like Marc Rich hurt the country like Caspar Weinberger did, when Bush Sr. pardoned him, or Jimmy Carter pardoning Watergate figure G. Gordon Liddy. Also, who cares who gave to his library? Who cared about Burkle, or the Kazakstan thing? NOTHING WAS ILLEGAL, AND A FORMER PRESIDENT DOES JETSET WITH RICH AND IMPORTANT PEOPLE! He is already "vetted," and because of the reasons I listed, he deserves some honor, along with his wife from "Democrats."

Second, she has every right to be mulling a VP spot. However, I agree with Sychotic1 that she will be offered the VP spot, as she should be, but she would decline. As much as we should all honor the Clintons, I don't think the ticket would do well in swing states, only because having both a woman and a black on a ticket may be too much for some middle americans who are already having trouble swallowing Obama. Many people who voted for Clinton may have voted for her because they didn't like Obama, not because they loved her. He should pick someone who supported them, or appeals to the working class like she did. Ted Strickland would be a good example. But she has everyright to be known in public as a VP hopeful. She did get the most, or second most votes for a Presidential candidate in a primary contest ever.

by DiamondJay 2008-05-23 08:13AM | 0 recs
Re: CNN Reports: Obama/Clinton in Formal Talks For

Now I understand why you troll rated me.

Diamond, all VP possibilities get vetted does not matter who or what they are or were. Bill has been out of office for eight years. He has done a lot of things since then and I am not saying they are bad. The Obama campaign has to know the whole picture so that come the GE campaign the Repugs to don't spring something on them that they could have found out about with a thorough vetting.

It's making sure not trashing or smearing.

by jsfox 2008-05-23 09:15AM | 0 recs

Diaries

Advertise Blogads